From the linked site:
When in 2007, the SSPX celebrated Benedict XVI’s promulgation of Summorum Pontificum,
which announced among other things, that the traditional rite had never been abrogated, that admission largely overshadowed some “timebombs” contained within the same document, such as:
“Needless to say, in order to experience full communion, the priests of the communities adhering to the former usage cannot, as a matter of principle, exclude celebrating according to the new books.”
“For that matter, the two Forms of the usage of the Roman Rite can be mutually enriching: new Saints and some of the new Prefaces can and should be inserted in the old Missal.” (Citation
In other words, in the same breath it is announced the old Rite was never abrogated, Rome announces its intention to abrogate it, by creating a new hybrid rite.
Pope Francis reiterated the Roman intention to infuse the traditional rite with elements of the Novus Ordo
in his Universae Ecclesiae
“25. New saints and certain of the new prefaces can and ought to be inserted into the 1962 Missal, according to provisions which will be indicated subsequently.
26. As foreseen by article 6 of the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum, the readings of the Holy Mass of the Missal of 1962 can be proclaimed either solely in the Latin language, or in Latin followed by the vernacular or, in Low Masses, solely in the vernacular.
27. With regard to the disciplinary norms connected to celebration, the ecclesiastical discipline contained in the Code of Canon Law of 1983 applies.” (Citation
Translation: Rome intends to plow ahead with the “reform of the reform,” and impose it on all those communities availing themselves of Summorum Pontificum
: Epistle/Gospel readings in the vernacular only; 1 hour fast; new “saints” and prefaces; and presumably, most of the other innovations of the 1965 rubrics, which are considered to be the “real Mass of Vatican II” (See here for why
Now the conciliar Tridentina Malta
blog is reporting that:
“sometime in the second half of 2018, the Novus Ordo Lectionary and Calendar are to be imposed upon the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Mass…The new Roman Missal will become available on the First Sunday of Advent 2018 but the Vatican will allow a two-year period to phase it in. These changes are expected to be much more drastic than what was envisaged in Universae Ecclesiae
…The Vatican approved societies and institutes, such as the Fraternity of Saint Peter and the Institute of Christ the King, will likely apply for exemptions, but all requests are expected to be turned down. The only exception seems to be the SSPX, which might be granted a temporary exemption, to ensure that an agreement is reached between the SSPX and Rome.”
In other words, the SSPX is being baited, and will have the 1962 rug pulled out from under their own feet at a later date.
“The more things change, the more they stay the same.”
Rome senses the weakness of Bishop Fellay from all the compromises already extracted, and from 20 years of ralliement,
knows he is on the hook.
So well hooked is he, that not even the 1962 Missal is safe.
In fact, it is doomed.
How will the SSPX clergy and faithful react to the reintroduction of substantially the same 1965 Missal that Archbishop Lefebvre eventually turned his back on as being insufficient for the formation of traditional priests?
Well, if the disinterest and apathy of the last several years is any barometer, they will go right along with Cranmer’s, er, Francis and Fellay’s revolution.
The interesting part is to see how Menzingen will go about “preparing minds” to set them all up for this future infidelity.
At my own SSPX chapel, some changes began to be implemented several years ago, while others have popped up only in the last couple months. Here is a description of some of them:
- Standing through the Agnus Dei, rather than kneeling as we had always done (and which is a much more liturgically congruent posture for the faithful during a penitential prayer). Remember, Vatican II wanted “active participation,” which it erroneously equated with “vocal participation,” despite the teaching to the contrary of St. Pius X. Now, how can you “actively/vocally” participate (i.e., sing with the choir) if you are on your knees pounding your chest? Therefore, stand it is!
- The altar boys now say the “Domine non sum dignus” aloud with the priest, as opposed to a 40 years custom to the contrary. More erroneous active = vocal participation. It also gets the servers used to saying prayers proper to the priest (which in turn encourages the faithful to babble along with them).
- No more triple genuflection during Holy Week at the adoration of the cross (“Well hey, that was part of the pre-Pius XII reforms anyway, so that is actually proper.” Yes, but enforcing Pius XII’s innovations in this regard was never the custom here. Why the sudden concern the last few years?
- No more adoration of the cross in socks (Keep your shoes on!). This gets an explicit mention in the bulletin (as does the abolition of the triple genuflection), which proves an interruption of the faithful’s customs from those of the older practice.
- No more refusing to genuflect for the Jews on Good Friday. It used to be that a good number of SSPX priests refused to genuflect for the Jews, and kept to the traditional practice (i.e., pre-1956 experimental rubrics of Pius XII), which omitted the “flectamus genua,” since that was the posture the Jews used to mock Our Lord.
Additionally, one could cite the proliferation of the Dialogue Mass throughout all SSPX schools and seminaries (which implements all the same faulty liturgical principles of the Novus Ordo
, which is precisely why and how we arrived at it!):
- Equating vocal participation with active participation
- Blurring the distinction between the sacrificial and ministerial priesthood with the priesthood of the faithful
- Bending the Mass to the “needs” of the apostolate
- Using the Mass as a catechetical tool
- Encouraging the faithful to take a more “active” (i.e., vocal) participation in the Mass
- Extending the prayer responses beyond the sanctuary into the pews (not the choir), so why not go versus populum?
Rome’s plans are exposed in broad daylight, and Menzingen is complicit.
As Michael Davies stated:
“Likewise, the 1965 Missal was intended to condition the faithful into accepting without protest the radically reformed Missal of 1969.”
If, then, Menzingen agrees to plow forward with the ralliement, despite Rome’s very transparent and public intention to morph the 1962 Missal into something more along the lines of 1965, how then can the Society escape Michael Davies’ indictment?